 |
| Helo Flying Over High River, Alberta 2018 (Photo by V.A. McMillan) |
This post will bring this discussion on a Canada First Model for National Defence to a close for the time being. Before exploring Air Assets, here are links to the previous parts of this discussion:
https://mtnmanblog.blogspot.com/2021/04/future-cf-structure-from-partisan.html
https://mtnmanblog.blogspot.com/2021/05/canada-first-model-for-national-defence.html
https://mtnmanblog.blogspot.com/2021/06/canada-first-model-land-assets.html
As has been discussed previously, a Canada First Model for National Defence wants to have a Canadian focus. A focus on meeting Canadian strategic, tactical, and operational needs FIRST! Further, these assets want to be build in Canada, by Canadian companies, employing Canadian workers at fair living wages. This process wants to be free of petty political interference and political pork barrelling patronage. This wants to respect and honour the Canadian taxpayer who will fund this and protect the national security of Canadians who call Canada home.
To increase the strategic, tactical, and operational level of the Royal Canadian Air Force, they need the tools to do their job. In my opinion, those tools could look like this:
I will suggest quantities in Squadron (Sqn) units. Maybe a current air force personnel could educate me on how many aircraft - primary and reserve, constitute a squadron. For now, we will use the Sqn unit to allocate type of aircraft and which region they would be based from. I have maintained the same regions as previously presented for Naval and Land Assets - Pacific, Prairie, Central Canada, Atlantic, and Northern. Remember this is a starting point for a discussion on how to defend Canada from all enemies foreign and domestic. The actual numbers needed may far exceed the chart above, however, the chart above exceeds our current inventory. We can agree to disagree, except that we need more assets to give our fighting men and women the best chance at completing their mission and survival on the modern battlefield.
INTERCEPTOR
Canada is a HUGE country with a small population; thus, we need interceptor aircraft that can be deployed to prevent intrusions into our sovereign airspace. Otherwise, that airspace will no longer be ours. This concept was well understood during the Cold War Era. In fact, Canada developed the BEST interceptor ever in the late 1950's, the AVRO Arrow, built by the A.V. Roe Company. There have been great debates over the decades about the AVRO Arrow and whether Canada should have continued to manufacture them or bow down to external pressures to kill the program. Evidently, the Arrow program was deep-sixed. However, if rumours are true all documents for this aircraft are sealed and kept safe...somewhere. Meaning the Arrow could be resurrected. So, since this was an aircraft ahead of its time in a military performance point-of-view, a new version of this craft could still be the best bet for Canada's defence in the skies. I would suggest a new version would maintain all the original avionics and controls as backups to modern computer aided flight controls. The original control system, while outdated by today's standards was designed to operate in an EMP environment which modern electronics have challenges with.
The Arrow Mk I out performed any jet aircraft in the mid-1950's; and that was with sub-standard engines. The Mk II was to be upgraded to the proper engines and Mk III and Mk IV versions were being developed to improve this platform even more. Imagine a large interceptor jet that can be used for air-to-air missions, carry nuclear and non-nuclear payloads, or surveillance gear. Although, too large for dogfighting, in the interceptor role this aircraft, even today, would excel.
The Super Arrow project makes me think someone else shares the sentiment that the Arrow should make a comeback and become the primary air defence aircraft in Canada.
Arrow Mk II
Arrow Mk IV
Super Arrow
LOCAL AIR DEFENCE
As Canada is such a large country, it is unreasonable for all tactical aircraft to be hidden away on fortified airfields in remote locations. To this end, in my opinion, it would be advisable to have military airstrips near each large urban area in Canada. Each of these airstrips would support at least one squadron of Local Air Defence aircraft. These aircraft want to be fast and nimble, deployable in minutes, and carry enough munitions to cause enemy aircraft to backoff from civilian targets. I am thinking something of the magnitude of an Alpha Jet. It does not need to be an Alpha Jet, just a nimble little fighter jet that can get the job done.
Alpha Jet
This is one product I would hope could be manufactured by Bombardier. Most Canadians are sick and tired of the various federal governments that seem to feel compelled to hand over millions of tax dollars to support this company. I would prefer, if funds are needed to be handed out that Canadians see something in return. An Alpha Jet sized fighter jet might be worth giving Bombardier one more chance to give back to Canada. Like building ships or armoured fighting vehicles, we need Canadian manufacturers to build aircraft. If Bombardier is not up to the task, maybe another company will rise to the challenge. The political elites killed the A.V. Roe Company when they cancelled the Arrow. And it is a long time since World War Two when Canada had many aviation companies making planes of many types.
The tactical advantage to having a squadron of Local Air Defence fighters would be response time in minutes not hours.
AIR SUPERIORITY FIGHTER
The Air Superiority Fighter is for meeting international agreements/commitments - NORAD & NATO. These aircraft have to be able to operate seamlessly with our Allies. The avionics and communications encryption equipment needed for these missions are found in few aircraft. The F-35 Lightning II is an aircraft that is very expensive, however it might be a good aircraft to survive on a modern battlefield. It is what our Allies are selecting as their primary response aircraft and with few options to select from, I would suggest we either pony up and stay in the game or cash out our chips and become like Sweden and become a neutral country without external military operations, focus purely on self-defence. Which would be a tough go without Allies.
 |
| F-35 Lightning II |
TRAINER
Before new pilots are handed the controls of an expensive fighter jet, they need to learn on something more powerful than a prop driven plane. So, a modern jet trainer would be a needed asset in the inventory. I am suggesting something like the T-45 Goshawk; however, if Bombardier starts manufacturing fighter jets, maybe they could build a trainer version, too. The Goshawk and the Alpha Jet are in a similar size category. I do not have a favourite, other than fast and nimble will win the day.
As with almost all assets for defending a large country, you need well made equipment that can do the job very well and you need lots and lots of them. Whatever the Local Air Defence aircraft is, make the trainer an unarmed version of that aircraft and increase the inventory of a single platform.
T-45 Goshawk
RECONNAISSANCE & ASW
To support successful operations you need accurate, timely intelligence...which is best obtain from first hand sources. To this end, the Canadian Forces needs to ensure it has timely access to information of what is happening on the battlefield. This is can be achieved with the deployment of Reconnaissance Aircraft. Here I see two aircraft with separate missions. First, would be a Mk IV Arrow (or newer variant) which has a few air-to-air missiles for local defence from hostile aircraft and the rest of the carrying capacity being devoted to surveillance equipment and extra or larger fuel tanks. The Arrow was already fast in the Mk I, the other versions were even faster. When your aircraft is flying in hostile air, being fast and giving your foes as little time as possible to shoot you, gives you a survival edge. The second is for sub hunting; in this case the updated CP-140 Aurora is still a good aircraft for this mission.
Canada has had a problem, a re-occurring problem, with military equipment purchases...it has not been what we purchase; rather how long we keep the exact equipment in service. The CF-18 is a good plane. The Sea King is a good helicopter. The Aurora is a great plane. The problem comes when inept government types fail to purchase replacements in a timely fashion. Every piece of military equipment from rifles to aircraft have a SERVICE LIFE, when you exceed that you put people's lives at risk unnecessarily!!!
AVRO Arrow Mk IV
CP-140 Aurora - ASW Sub Hunter
CARGO
Canada has two cargo aircraft missions - Strategic and Tactical. Strategic is usually over greater distances and usually a tactical bound behind enemy fire. While, tactical transports are generally over shorter distances but closer to the enemy.
We have a good strategic cargo aircraft in the C-17 Globemaster. It has a large lift ability and can travel great distances...we just need more of them.
C-17 Globemaster
We also have a good tactical cargo aircraft in the C-130 Hercules. We should upgrade and enhance our fleet of C-130's to C-130J's. Again, the challenge is not the plane but the quantity and having enough deployed at strategic separation from each other.
We should have at least one squadron of C-130J's in each province. These aircraft are important for the military and for emergency management operations like forest fires, floods, or tornadoes; to bring in relief supplies.
C-130J Hercules
OPERATIONAL SUPPORT
The C-130 family of aircraft are available in a great variety of configurations. The three variants that could be useful in Canada include the water tanker (fighting forest fires), the airtanker (air-to-air refuelling), and Special Operations variant.
I doubt Canadians would ever endorse getting a Spectre gunship version of the C-130...so no need to bring up that version. Canadian Forces members who work in harm's way of course would like to know someone on high is watching their six and capable of suppressing any threats with the depression of a trigger...
So, let's look at something a little less scary than the AC-130 Spectre...the C-130-SOF.
C-130 SOF Operations Support Aircraft
The C-130-SOF provides the technical support, communications support, and close ground support that advance infantry operations require to stay healthy on the battlefield. Canada would not need many of these aircraft...however, if a few were available for those important missions they would be a Godsend to the troops on the ground. Just saying...
SEARCH & RESCUE
Search & Rescue (SAR) missions can happen anywhere, at anytime...those in need of help see a SAR Tech as a prayer being answered. With the C-115 Buffalo being replaced by the C-295 Kingfisher, we are making steps in the right direction in so far as replacing aging aircraft.
CC-295 Kingfisher SAR Aircraft
While fixed wing aircraft are important for searching large areas and stay aloft for hours, when the mission switches to rescue mode, you need aircraft which can hover, land on a dime, and take-off without a runway. Canada has two helicopters to answer these needs - the CH-146 Griffon and the CH-149 Cormorant. We, again, just need to make sure we have enough to meet the needs of Canadians from coast-to-coast-to-coast.
REMOTE PILOTED VEHICLE
CH-146 Griffon
CH-149 Cormorant
To stay abreast with the ever changing technologies on the battlefield I would be remiss if I failed to mention that Canada needs to have Remote Piloted Vehicles (drones) in our arsenal. I do not have any pictures for this category, but I am confident there are Canadian companies with the skills and technology necessary to ensure the Canadian Forces could have a fleet of drones for battlefield support armed with anti-tank missiles and another fleet of drones designed for surveillance.
Future design improvements might also allow for other missions like SAR - where the drone would land at the site where the survivors are to provide needed supplies until weather clears for SAR Tech to parachute in or SAR helicopters to land.
BOMBER
The last category for discussion, Bombers...do we still need the capability to drop bombs on ground targets?? Laser guided munitions help reduce collateral damage. If we are in a self-defence position, would it be prudent to have the ability to repel attackers around our cities by dropping bombs on them?? Or is this outdated thinking all together?? For the sake of discussion, I would suggest if we do need the capability to drop bombs, we would need an aircraft like the C-17 Globemaster, that was adapted for dropping bombs. The C-17 has a good lift capability, it is quick, and has a long flight range.
There you have it, my thoughts on what it would take to properly defend Canada from all enemies foreign and domestic on the seas, land, or in the air. Post your thoughts if you care to enter this discussion and let's see what kind of solutions we can generate.
Until next time...work on solutions!
Mountainman.
No comments:
Post a Comment